Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On Fr, 2013-10-04 at 13:40 +0200, Dominik George wrote: Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net schrieb: Then, do you mean that VCS hashes are sortable? Of course not. One would have to do something like 0~MMDDnn +git in that rare case. My argument for keeping the VCS hash is to ease identifying the code in the package. You could put the VCS hash as text in the changelog entry, e.g. New upstream snapshot (git commit ). and just use the date as Debian version (0~MMDD or 0.MMDD). In case you need to release two upstream snapshots on the same date, you can append .2 (0~MMDD.2). -- Benjamin Drung Debian Ubuntu Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1381869150.2681.3.camel@erde
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Thanks ! On 15/10/13 22:32, Benjamin Drung wrote: On Fr, 2013-10-04 at 13:40 +0200, Dominik George wrote: Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net schrieb: Then, do you mean that VCS hashes are sortable? Of course not. One would have to do something like 0~MMDDnn +git in that rare case. My argument for keeping the VCS hash is to ease identifying the code in the package. You could put the VCS hash as text in the changelog entry, e.g. New upstream snapshot (git commit ). and just use the date as Debian version (0~MMDD or 0.MMDD). In case you need to release two upstream snapshots on the same date, you can append .2 (0~MMDD.2). I finally asked to the upstream maintainer if he could add a version string suffix to his source tarball name: he did, no more tricks and everything is fine now. Anyway, thanks a lot for all the hints and replies. Best wishes, Jerome -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/525daf6b.5050...@rezozer.net
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On 2013-10-02 16:51:09 +0200, Dominik George wrote: Dominique Dumont d...@debian.org schrieb: well, you proposed a version like 'hg'. if upstream switches to git, you can't use a version like 'git' because it sorts before hg. I grant you that is easy to work around. If you deem it unlikely that two commits are made in the same day (which happens all the time), how likely is it that upstream switches VCSs and does an important commit on the same day? Forget the VCS switch. An important commit on the same day is still possible and not unlikely (e.g. in case of a security problem or important regression noticed a few hours later). Then, do you mean that VCS hashes are sortable? -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131004113710.gg3...@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On 2013-10-02 17:50:40 +0200, Dominik George wrote: I established an advantage for the user using my proposal - go get me a disadvantage for the packager. As a user, I dislike long version strings. That said, what's the point in NOT being verbose? Version strings need to be displayed, and if they take too much space, they may be truncated (e.g. in aptitude). -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131004113135.gf3...@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net schrieb: Then, do you mean that VCS hashes are sortable? Of course not. One would have to do something like 0~MMDDnn+git in that rare case. My argument for keeping the VCS hash is to ease identifying the code in the package. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSTqktMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJeukB/4gLywabqbqVA4ZA1xPxxM6 kZBdfisfn0WJn9ROGJEIYy47BYKKhLTpjZso1hKDUe8hT1/jdMewOp8mM7/WqGAg zmgKbBQT3S+DrVxvLxbl9H1n8yUR2pwkJNu/nq8dH2glNR3QJWyXwrzWlTs4mBTW zFS+dV7WQqYFInm/GTl/fM8nSHfNS4a1O9Xg7UyQCPbSnOxhbdKtD/yupDeSjs9G 536OW/i8v4hPbOxFNQloqGAZ54YGUt4pHDmHacxhWllYsAet3fe20yUqhzgeHJP3 1+9VPjRON06M1DgfeoBJUSVwWKQmdJBzhP4X/C2i0kK60tcf+ewDtukfE8Vwr8mO =7jDN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/f07e8cfe-fe83-42ff-8af4-a1082e16f...@email.android.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On 2013-10-04 13:40:29 +0200, Dominik George wrote: My argument for keeping the VCS hash is to ease identifying the code in the package. Does it need to be in the version string? Why not somewhere else? The goal of the Version field in Debian packages is to identify and sort several versions of Debian packages, and also give human-understandable version information (a hash doesn't), not to identify some specific upstream code. -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131004115029.ga11...@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Hello, On 04/10/13 13:50, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2013-10-04 13:40:29 +0200, Dominik George wrote: My argument for keeping the VCS hash is to ease identifying the code in the package. Does it need to be in the version string? Why not somewhere else? The goal of the Version field in Debian packages is to identify and sort several versions of Debian packages, and also give human-understandable version information (a hash doesn't), not to identify some specific upstream code. For Mercurial VCS, date can be used as kind of hash: see the ``orig.tar from mercurial checkout'' section in wiki.debian.org/onlyjob/get-orig-source hth, Jerome -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/524eb8e6.5010...@rezozer.net
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 01:31:35PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2013-10-02 17:50:40 +0200, Dominik George wrote: That said, what's the point in NOT being verbose? Version strings need to be displayed, and if they take too much space, they may be truncated (e.g. in aptitude). They can also be very confusing for users. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131004132125.GB17257@debian
how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Hello, I am packaging a versionless library software maintained via a mercurial repository. Is there any custom for this case ? If not, can we use the version format 'hgMMDD' ? Best regards, Jerome -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/524c1dec.5070...@rezozer.net
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Jerome BENOIT g62993...@rezozer.net schrieb: Hello, I am packaging a versionless library software maintained via a mercurial repository. Is there any custom for this case ? If not, can we use the version format 'hgMMDD' ? Best regards, Jerome I tend to use: 0~MMDD+hgXX It sorts just below anything upstream might invent later (I don't like epoch). - -nik - -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSTCRcMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJai+B/wIpL0jbgsUcu8ISj/yEFe9 EjhMAld0veQnETq6yZhXrWM32h1Y70N/4BDVrt4NySM+kqn3wFZcQ3EAuEpYACg8 d4HxdVhvEfz8XO9nxVHXCwXoDl1pYvKkOHPJTxjDOWrwvNnxWjJklzfep2TdlefO Tj64mQB81IBB+ayKgy+VkSBPUZFj2TzHznteTHllkPTV5HTj0+dw/lqaq3P9oz3R 1C8a8Oi8k6v8YmyEN46H9PM7MSfuS7q41CU4Ri8NAEPjqsTBlQfLpnc3YdLVBtz5 P4hKEVkCob5pQYXKEng7EGFe0QNxPD+NQlZV7W2UOuuIkU6iPsodxnGtt4YPd0vR =aq9p -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/d4f88f68-a946-4b6b-bace-e5e52e00d...@email.android.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On Wednesday 02 October 2013 15:21:48 Jerome BENOIT wrote: I am packaging a versionless library software maintained via a mercurial repository. Is there any custom for this case ? If not, can we use the version format 'hgMMDD' ? As a user, I don't care about upstream repo. You should use a version derived from the date only. This way, you won't be in trouble if upstream switches to git. HTH -- https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/6009516.5IaAEo4kzY@ylum
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Hi Nik, thanks for your quick reply. On 02/10/13 15:49, Dominik George wrote: Jerome BENOIT g62993...@rezozer.net schrieb: Hello, I am packaging a versionless library software maintained via a mercurial repository. Is there any custom for this case ? If not, can we use the version format 'hgMMDD' ? Best regards, Jerome I tend to use: 0~MMDD+hgXX It sorts just below anything upstream might invent later (I don't like epoch). Ok. What does 'XX' stand for ? Thanks in advance, Jerome -nik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/524c2653.8060...@rezozer.net
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, What does 'XX' stand for ? The short commit hash, as proposed in your initial mail. You should use a version derived from the date only. This way, you won't be in trouble if upstream switches to git. I absolutely do not see why this should be an issue. Using just a date is not uniquely idemtifiable. - -nik - -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSTCgeMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJeL5B/9SdDXgBzfNxRFvUrC9BEJN YQu8FwLcGRXhKYPVezCWkqV+yNocO7w7UZg3bgfFJgEOWhp3Yzt1xLKhtOMdcuqk 7TV6M3/hvWqujGeDPRoLmYKr0OSUMR9pVRlpzWcWS9g24Mw1fFj5iifCv36hOK3M ZwPjTpu38B02UcvNJ0LJsbYeLk1FEFz/9gouqYGEHx8llJwe6g33OVpIqEzK3dBP 0FuRMlPn7KTmnZSnODtdcEz6WIWZ0cwihWdgiRWnUuB+V+VLhWbuuycivIv0h62E RV6/JLf5NU3tCuKr6+VzxjZeaGNfjf9SvkA9wsDMMKoVpVyGWE3aDE4zCp37clSL =4zTf -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8e227d40-46a1-4b67-a34f-9b1d46ffb...@email.android.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Hello, On 02/10/13 16:05, Dominik George wrote: Hi, What does 'XX' stand for ? The short commit hash, as proposed in your initial mail. In my first email, what you read as a commit hash was meant to be the date. To summarise: 0~MMDD should be fine. Thanks, Jerome You should use a version derived from the date only. This way, you won't be in trouble if upstream switches to git. I absolutely do not see why this should be an issue. Using just a date is not uniquely idemtifiable. -nik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/524c2bc3.3010...@rezozer.net
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 0~MMDD should be fine. It isn't, it is not a unique identifier for the one release you are packaging. - -nik -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSTCxtMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJfo8B/9A3TT7GJcYern0/bNeVWZu YQwYkS/7G9M6890zSB01ACW8Ieh8LUz3Zqo6jAlyJciw5eiokF6ueAA32dgetusj tgv3jexN5zIWBn6fBmOIBjFtvVPDY5k8lW0UMdkjXbfLxuucUUGPnQB2QQRDw8lg s+TGfZEnzlkgP5K0+vu1uTd2GsI20MlRKhQn7nM9TEcCO8ElB3E8Ojp1czDgQAvh qdeRBc1Fk2BQ142FSxmGb0vVvjmSrNU/ByMrwK1xTn6Yl4elVKYQIdo9L0zQuWxm RpsYfo4EXG6nW0OSs2jvEeYEikx3XCHh9BOW7kLEYFaGIGQZALqhho2yieYCmZJq =afA2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ca481637-535b-4a10-8483-73c89c847...@email.android.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
+++ Dominik George [2013-10-02 15:49 +0200]: Jerome BENOIT g62993...@rezozer.net schrieb: Hello, I am packaging a versionless library software maintained via a mercurial repository. Is there any custom for this case ? I tend to use: 0~MMDD+hgXX It sorts just below anything upstream might invent later (I don't like epoch). This is good advice. I've been bitten by just using MMDD as the version on unversioned code, and then upstream eventually inventing a version number, which of course is much smaller than 20 million, so I had to put in an epoch. Which doesn't really matter but just seems kind of annoying and unnecessary. The 'use an ISO date as version' idea comes from advice in the developer packaging docs somewhere. It would be good if this 0~ trick was mentioned there too so one could decide whether to use it or not at the time of initial packaging. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131002142447.gz32...@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
+++ Dominik George [2013-10-02 16:23 +0200]: 0~MMDD should be fine. It isn't, it is not a unique identifier for the one release you are packaging. No, but it can be a sufficient identifier so long as you don't make more than one release a day. Which exact tag/branch/hash/whatever was used for the orig tarball can be recorded elsewhere in the release. It doesn't have to go in the version number - that's a decision for the packager. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131002142741.ga32...@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Wookey woo...@wookware.org schrieb: +++ Dominik George [2013-10-02 16:23 +0200]: 0~MMDD should be fine. It isn't, it is not a unique identifier for the one release you are packaging. No, but it can be a sufficient identifier so long as you don't make more than one release a day. Which exact tag/branch/hash/whatever was used for the orig tarball can be recorded elsewhere in the release. It doesn't have to go in the version number - that's a decision for the packager. Wookey From a power-user point of view, I want to see what version of a package is in Debian by looking through the package lists, without having to download the source package or some other awkward steps. A packager might package a 3 year old commit now, and use today's date as version. You see that it does not serve identifying upstream version in any way, it's just a useless piece of information. - -nik - -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSTDANMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJXyZB/9MYekwEsdPMe/RC7QuaDUa CxsSvL0wXVTn/MhA52cTv2VLJb8TTLnlNywc0yJPL0yMTrj2cZJzi2kcpWX7WXZX vawbjy4UY+pk4GqCUWdU1lcCFhjz9Lr5FNUIZ56UbYPbv9OFYpsNeoUCxUU4ITUp UF14dAf4kYAsC/H0ECvEuPcauFqRQSo11Nrjdx0QA3N19EETA4FMcmB05muhVUTM ux2ePdDmfEPPk2alnNyErQUDgfVhKPCO8S1FUz32iTqhnjQcIRyEElC1Y8HrTiUH C1c7UxASQR1H3+SdSEdVqZvXvb/Hpa2g3JyUM2xnyjHDNW8AF8DcolHu80pA3AIe =ocrV -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/9ca73438-e12d-428b-b337-8c5f76330...@email.android.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On Wednesday 02 October 2013 16:05:18 Dominik George wrote: You should use a version derived from the date only. This way, you won't be in trouble if upstream switches to git. I absolutely do not see why this should be an issue. well, you proposed a version like 'hg'. if upstream switches to git, you can't use a version like 'git' because it sorts before hg. I grant you that is easy to work around. -- https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1513720.o6RvIdZZlo@ylum
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Wookey wrote: +++ Dominik George [2013-10-02 15:49 +0200]: Jerome BENOIT g62993...@rezozer.net schrieb: Hello, I am packaging a versionless library software maintained via a mercurial repository. Is there any custom for this case ? I tend to use: 0~MMDD+hgXX It sorts just below anything upstream might invent later (I don't like epoch). This is good advice. I've been bitten by just using MMDD as the version on unversioned code, and then upstream eventually inventing a version number, which of course is much smaller than 20 million, so I had to put in an epoch. Which doesn't really matter but just seems kind of annoying and unnecessary. The 'use an ISO date as version' idea comes from advice in the developer packaging docs somewhere. It would be good if this 0~ trick was mentioned there too so one could decide whether to use it or not at the time of initial packaging. Another point to make - please chase the upstream to at least tag things from time to time to help people trying to release and use their code. It seems that releasing tarballs isn't cool enough for the 'leet github generation, but tags and reproducibility still matter. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression: http://www.eff.org/cafe/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1vrngh-0001zv...@mail.einval.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Dominique Dumont d...@debian.org schrieb: On Wednesday 02 October 2013 16:05:18 Dominik George wrote: You should use a version derived from the date only. This way, you won't be in trouble if upstream switches to git. I absolutely do not see why this should be an issue. well, you proposed a version like 'hg'. if upstream switches to git, you can't use a version like 'git' because it sorts before hg. I grant you that is easy to work around. If you deem it unlikely that two commits are made in the same day (which happens all the time), how likely is it that upstream switches VCSs and does an important commit on the same day? - -nik . -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSTDLdMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJZcSB/0Y0qa176+WM6I+lR+62QUY lEN9SW1gAAUpz5NV+1UJlqbgIz8VbxvHVEXcfAtVhYqVzYdQ6XLrbAHwAuQb7lKK ge7iV0GGLRlBJl97n9c5gqNMKCScEkVG4d1nDO4rn1o/7ghBfaz+yGlFt9woODQn ByDGB907Ng9fF7FrQ+rn+XH6ROI0OQBbDDNFTUEpst3lLoaVuMUxXUWQKimt0Kcq 6rVwhA5itJFA59zOufxME2OuUJe5surrfnhJApDZq2+Rzsy0E6PuwGCr8qtzepER B5uZ9BqVPEUj0UdMty9YreZnz2oNNUgifM2IKg7je5ZmVo7qsh10Opl1Y/68bkr4 =bC2y -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/06c8759a-1922-4d0e-b157-feb9e165c...@email.android.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Wookey woo...@wookware.org (2013-10-02): The 'use an ISO date as version' idea comes from advice in the developer packaging docs somewhere. It would be good if this 0~ trick was mentioned there too so one could decide whether to use it or not at the time of initial packaging. http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#s3.2.1 Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On Wednesday 02 October 2013 16:51:09 Dominik George wrote: well, you proposed a version like 'hg'. if upstream switches to git, you can't use a version like 'git' because it sorts before hg. I grant you that is easy to work around. If you deem it unlikely that two commits are made in the same day (which happens all the time), how likely is it that upstream switches VCSs and does an important commit on the same day? that's not the issue. Try that: dpkg --compare-versions 1.hg2012 '=' 1.git2013 || echo 'false' -- https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5009015.R4oBotHMLD@ylum
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Hi, On 2 October 2013 17:27, Dominique Dumont d...@debian.org wrote: If you deem it unlikely that two commits are made in the same day (which happens all the time), how likely is it that upstream switches VCSs and does an important commit on the same day? that's not the issue. Try that: dpkg --compare-versions 1.hg2012 '=' 1.git2013 || echo 'false' Weren't we talking about 0~20131002.hg2efc4fcd vs 0~20131002.git67ed491a? -- WBR, Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cacujmdnhtmpsh7f3gcqnbc90vtab2zlholda5j-82f2gsez...@mail.gmail.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
On Wednesday 02 October 2013 17:31:02 Andrew Shadura wrote: dpkg --compare-versions 1.hg2012 '=' 1.git2013 || echo 'false' Weren't we talking about 0~20131002.hg2efc4fcd vs 0~20131002.git67ed491a? Sorry, I confused between Jerome original mail and Dominik's proposal. Dominik's idea raises no issue at all. Sorry for the trouble. -- https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/7851424.dI8Gh107z1@ylum
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Quoting Dominik George (2013-10-02 16:39:09) Wookey woo...@wookware.org schrieb: +++ Dominik George [2013-10-02 16:23 +0200]: 0~MMDD should be fine. It isn't, it is not a unique identifier for the one release you are packaging. No, but it can be a sufficient identifier so long as you don't make more than one release a day. Which exact tag/branch/hash/whatever was used for the orig tarball can be recorded elsewhere in the release. It doesn't have to go in the version number - that's a decision for the packager. Wookey From a power-user point of view, I want to see what version of a package is in Debian by looking through the package lists, without having to download the source package or some other awkward steps. A packager might package a 3 year old commit now, and use today's date as version. You see that it does not serve identifying upstream version in any way, it's just a useless piece of information. A packager is not required to serve users with such specific needs. That said, I recommend to use the date of newest commit, not packaging date. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 A packager is not required to serve users with such specific needs. Hmm, I last saw that attitude when being explained the Arch way. I established an advantage for the user using my proposal - go get me a disadvantage for the packager. That said, what's the point in NOT being verbose? - -nik -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.0.8-fdroid iQFNBAEBCgA3BQJSTEDPMBxEb21pbmlrIEdlb3JnZSAobW9iaWxlIGtleSkgPG5p a0BuYXR1cmFsbmV0LmRlPgAKCRAvLbGk0zMOJdszB/sFTL5LyhKjXavXzGRU7OdR 0Kp2yKKmShyGI+ElOmzF/1bDAD38UrQRJ+DvIYTLeLm3zJ51DeYA//svFKrKWs7J SDIuzUx6vGJgcDdEwxm2oY11emgrd9YDyVuRi06/b9kh7T0kff1jy/PxiAB4IMAm WVc5zH4+frgLlP3yw7pWwUZsfgXmJ6jOdHrX9SvupBF3FWtuZOi6ocwDI7wFZO8L ZbT97lUk7vSIB/BPwyhr2G8TAoQSnyUVp18Wtq8WKfJogX3IBjXwlE+hEqtICqGm 9cGQNTCKqkJEHcWsu1/ZQITw4qedFz/gRl3BxXorAbhIVMl6iZXirrGXqkOtsMSi =LX+C -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/629e8051-c748-4f03-9218-6d683206a...@email.android.com
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Hi, Wookey woo...@wookware.org (2013-10-02): It would be good if this 0~ trick was mentioned there too Already in the New Maintainers' Guide: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/first#namever Regards David, kinda ashamed to add a message to that longish nitpicking thread signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Jerome BENOIT g62993...@rezozer.net writes: I am packaging a versionless library software maintained via a mercurial repository. Is there any custom for this case ? I have had a surprising rate of success simply asking upstream to make versioned release tarballs, or at least VCS tags for release versions. -- \“No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the | `\ American public.” —Henry L. Mencken | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/7wd2nnqxa3@benfinney.id.au
Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?
Hello All, I did not expected to initial such a thread: thanks a lot for all the messages On 02/10/13 20:24, David Prévot wrote: Hi, Wookey woo...@wookware.org (2013-10-02): It would be good if this 0~ trick was mentioned there too Already in the New Maintainers' Guide: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/first#namever I guessed I was too focused on the mercurial aspect of my stuff to forget the basics. Regards David, kinda ashamed to add a message to that longish nitpicking thread Best wishes, Jerome -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/524cb58b.6040...@rezozer.net
